Members of the Philippine government are bristling over parts of the State of the Union speech which lumped them in with the list of countries harboring terrorists which were put on notice that America would act if they didn't.
"It's clear in my mind that one president of a friendly country does not threaten another friendly country," Justice Secretary Hernando Perez said. "We don't depend on what the Americans claims to be necessary. We do seek assistance from them in case of need, but that doesn't mean they will run the foreign policy of our country."
Defense Secretary Angelo Reyes said Washington was free to freeze the assets of groups linked with terrorism or pursue diplomatic measures. "But some people would want to interpret it to mean that the US will impose its will, but we're a self-respecting sovereign state, and we will not allow any other country to impose its will on us if it's against our national interest," he said.
[via Red Rock Eater]
Use of Sanctions Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter: Summaries of past and current U.N. sanctions, with links to the ones in currently place.
Tempted by Oil, Russia Draws Ever Closer to Iraq: on the problems the American continued opposition to Iraq causes Russia, focusing on Lukoil's West Qurna oil field contract. That contract can't be developed under the current U.N. sanctions and might not survive Hussein's fall.
This 1997 report,Oil, Business, and the Future of Iraqi Sanctions, from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy summarizes the oil reserves and deals that were in place around the time Lukoil signed it's West Qurna contract.
An investigative committee of Enron's board has released its report on the breakdown of controls and ethics in the company.
Our investigation identified significant problems beyond those Enron
has already disclosed. Enron employees involved in the partnerships
were enriched, in the aggregate, by tens of millions of dollars they
should never have received -- Fastow by at least $30 million, Kopper
by at least $10 million, two others by $1 million each, and still two
more by amounts we believe were at least in the hundreds of thousands
of dollars. We have seen no evidence that any of these employees,
except Fastow, obtained the permission required by Enron's Code of
Conduct of Business Affairs to own interests in the partnerships.
Moreover, the extent of Fastow's ownership and financial windfall was
inconsistent with his representations to Enron's Board of Directors.
This personal enrichment of Enron employees, however, was merely one aspect of a deeper and more serious problem. These partnerships -- Chewco, LJM1, and LJM2 -- were used by Enron Management to enter into transactions that it could not, or would not, do with unrelated commercial entities. Many of the most significant transactions apparently were designed to accomplish favorable financial statement results, not to achieve bona fide economic objectives or to transfer risk. Some transactions were designed so that, had they followed applicable accounting rules, Enron could have kept assets and liabilities (especially debt) off of its balance sheet; but the transactions did not follow those rules.
The report is a 9 meg PDF. Here are some summaries: